Movies I Will Never See: Cannibal Holocaust
Filed under: Horror
I've only seen one Ruggero Deodato film, House on the Edge of the Park, and despite the fact that its director was in attendance at the screening I attended, I was not particularly entertained. It crossed the line between provocation and exploitation, and aside from the lithe presence of softcore star Annie Belle, it was a generally crass and misogynist chronicle of two guys holding a group of socialites hostage. But I'd sworn off Cannibal Holocaust long before I saw House on the Edge of the Park, because, quite frankly, I actually saw some of it, albeit in still-photograph form, and it messed me the hell up.
This is a film where, according to what I've heard, sexual assault is low on its list of egregious offenses to good taste. Genitals are mutilated, people are flayed, impaled and dismembered, and worst of all, real animals are killed. Oh yeah, and apparently there's cannibalism in it, too.
The film's trivia page on the IMDB would have you believe that Deodato repented for his cinematic sins and has since apologized for making the film. I'm not altogether surprised given the fact that the film was banned in 50 countries, and the director was brought up on murder charges until he proved that his cast did indeed survive their brush with a cannibalistic cult. But for this gorehound, the prospect of watching people ripped apart in a realistic fashion, and then watching animals get ripped apart for real, is just too much, even if Deodato and his crew had something more serious or meaningful to say amidst all of the death and dismemberment.
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
8-12-2009 @ 5:01PM
Alastair Foster said...
I have the film completely uncut on DVD.
It is shit.
Completely not worth the rediculous hype built around it. The animal deaths are unpleasant, but that is life. The actual tribes being filmed consider it just another meal.
I have no idea how the hell the director was bought up on murder charges though, the film is about as realistic as any other film at the time.
Seriously if the film wasn't banned in so many countries then its infamy would have died.
I am part of the problem myself, i REALLY wanted to see it and thus fed the hype machine and hightened my own expectations.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 5:34PM
David said...
I agree this is the film that I also refuse to watch, there are toehrs but i dont remmebr there names right now...but yeah i dont liek what i have heard about this film, there are some things that people should't have to witness.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 6:43PM
Mark Rooster said...
Agreed. I'm as big a horror fan as you're likely to find, but I have zero desire to watch anything featuring multiple actual animal killings and mutilations. Any point the director was trying to make, any anti-violence theme, is completely thrown out the window when you do something like that.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 6:42PM
Malcolm said...
Aaaand I'm done with this site.
Why would a blog/news site celebrating movies dedicate time to such reactionary dreck?
How can you judge it without any historical context or actual exposure to the film? Next time I want unnecessary narrow-minded contempt for challenging films I expect I will simply tune in to the 700 Club. Way to go.
Reply
8-13-2009 @ 12:36PM
C.A. said...
Lol! You should have just posted "I'll EAT you!!!". You are coming off a bit defensively for a post that is basically Todd's personal opinion on why he himself doesn't want to watch it.
8-12-2009 @ 6:52PM
Todd Gilchrist said...
Whoa whoa whoa, Malcolm. You've egregiously misinterpreted the raison d'etre of this feature series, much less my feelings about Cannibal Holocaust. I'm not "judging" the film in any way: I didn't say it was a bad movie, I didn't say it was without redeeming qualities, I didn't say anything about it at all - EXCEPT that I don't have the intestinal fortitude to endure watching animals be killed. I didn't make any assumptions about the filmmakers or the people who have seen the film, or who even WOULD want to see a film like that. But I can't watch that.
Incidentally if you think that a 500-word piece about a film released 30 years ago is "reactionary," then maybe you don't know what that word means. Moreover, if you are that upset by someone saying "this movie is too intense for me and so therefore I will never watch it," WHICH IS EXACTLY AND IN NO OTHER WAY WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOVE, then you need to grow up. A lot. Because people have different opinions about what they want and don't want to see, and it's not always going to be the same as what you want and don't want to see. And unfortunately, you're going to have to deal with that.
In any case, thanks for your comments. Good to know people out there are reading our articles, even if they're completely misunderstanding them.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 7:17PM
Sigfried said...
Showed this one at a 35mm film fest in Portland Oregon ( Grindhouse film fest). We warned people before the show and during the film we had two breakups and a divorce. The divorce was in the lobby, the lady was so mad, yelled out we need a divorce! And tried to throw a rope stantion.
We showed the movie based on a dare by the Alamo guys.
Plus we had a guy, who actually was pickiting the theater for animal cruielty. It was a bizarre screening, but a fun one.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 7:26PM
Todd Gilchrist said...
That sounds awesome, Sigfried! Ironically I was intrigued by the film's trailer because it has that laser-noise music (you know what I'm talking about if you've heard it) but I can never bring myself to actually sit down and check it out.
Thanks for your comment!
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 7:28PM
sjberry said...
I understand what you are doing here but do we really need more opinions on movies that people haven't actually seen. This is a good idea if it were one single story. Basically all you're telling me is how you don't know what the movie is about beside opinions and articles you've read on the internets. If you want to make this more interesting think about making these people watch these movies after they wrote the article.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 7:32PM
Todd Gilchrist said...
That's actually a terrific suggestion, sjberry. although in this case, it would take some serious clockwork orange-style restraint to get me to sit though the dissection of a turtle and the murder of a monkey (or at least that's what i hear).
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 8:31PM
benbligh said...
Todd,
I think it'd be great to read this column if you actually tried to watch the films you claim you'd never see. It'd be entertaining to read this posting on Cannibal Holocaust if you would do a follow up posting like "Movies I can't Un-Watch" and let us know what it was like to watch a film you thought you'd never see. (or at least try to sit through it)
Currently it makes little sense to just report buzz and rumors about movies that you have no intention of seeing. On the other hand, you could be our guinea pig and watch movies that are notoriously horrible and give us your perspective. Heck, you might find a film that you actually enjoy.
For a movie site, you at least owe it to the filmmakers (or smut peddlers in this case) to watch their movies. The good ones and the bad.
Anyone else with me?
PS: I own Cannibal Holocaust. (given to me by the guys at Grindhouse Releasing). I think the movie is important to see if you are a total cinephile. There's an elite club for people having seen it all the way through, secret cannibal decoder ring and all.
8-12-2009 @ 10:10PM
Brassy said...
I personally find these new "Films I'll never see" to be stupid.
Why would I want to hear criticism by a person who’s never seen the film there criticizing its dumb.
So you don't like gore, and you don’t want to watch a film that is an important staple of filmmaking for its early use of mockumentary techniques that are still used today.
Great, keep it too yourself, refusing to see a film is just plain dumb, I might have very little interest in watching a prairie home companion but i wont refuse to see anything you know why, cause i might be surprised.
keep your closed minds to yourselves
8-13-2009 @ 10:00AM
sjberry said...
Come to my house and I will gladly hold your eye lids open while we watch it. I can also invite a friend or two over to help incase you're wiry. It's just something you need to experience if you are a cinephile, especially if your a horror/gore fan.
8-12-2009 @ 7:46PM
Andy said...
There's only one film that I know of that I'll never see - Child's Play 2.
When I was around 12-13, my friend was due to have his birthday party, which would be a sleepover with rented movies etc. His parents were somewhat more liberal than mine and so he was planning on having the 'offending' film to watch.
Foolishly, I told my Mother, who turned to me in horror and expressly forbade me from EVER seeing it.
In hindsight I suspect this was due to the murder of a toddler, James Bulger, by two young boys in 1993 who had happened to have Child's Play 2 in their video collection. The media, reactionary as ever, had blamed the murder squarely on the film.
Clearly, this conclusion drawn by the media had quite an effect on my Mum, and her words has a powerful effect on me. To the this day I haven't watched it, even though I've heard a lot about how it isn't particularly scary or even extraordinarily violent. The exact moment she told I wasn't to watch it had a weirdly profound effect, and even now I feel I shouldn't go near it.
Strangely, just a year later my parents rented Starship Troopers for me and allowed me to watch it in all it's 18 (or R) rated glory.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 10:12PM
mezzaninex said...
Coincidentally, this is one of the movies I listed earlier that I regret seeing. It was like eating dog shit. It doesn't matter if you have the stomach for it or not, it's just a disgusting waste of time.
Reply
8-12-2009 @ 11:52PM
pagoda said...
Todd, I like this series. We all set limitations on what we will and will not experience--even those complaining about this article probably have their own list of movies they won't see--whether it's sappy romantic comedies or My Little Pony: The Movie. We all draw lines in the sand somewhere.
What's interesting is why we draw those lines. Some of them maybe need to be erased, but some don't--which ones, though? And why? Which socially squeamish barriers do we need to re-examine?
(My guess: cannibalism and animal killings are probably not in that category.)
Reply
8-13-2009 @ 12:37PM
Jaded said...
Todd,
I have to agree you on this one, but for far different reason. In 7th grade, right after my mother had forbidden it (at the time it wasn't well known that a bunch of the scenes were indeed faked), I went to a friends house and watched the original Faces of Death. Most of the film, while gross, I found pretty funny as even in 7th grade I had no sympathy for people getting hurt for doing stupid stuff. (Clearly not including the napalming Vietnam or Hilter footage in that comment.) That all changed once the scene with the monkey getting his head smacked with a hammer and his brains eaten was shown. I couldn't finish watching at that point (which is good since clubbing baby seals would have put me over the edge) and was traumatized by the fact that people could be so cruel.
To this day whenever I someone says anything about cruelty to animals or eating brains (not necessarily in the same conversation) my mind will flash back to that scene.
Before anyone points it out. I know the irony of all of this is it's my own fault for being stupid and seeing the movie.
Based on that though there are now a list of movies that I just can't see starting with the Faces of Death series and including this film.
Reply
9-11-2009 @ 7:44PM
SICKOPATH said...
I've heard many people express their intentions to never watch "Cannibal Holocaust", many of them listing the same reasons you have given. And that's fine. However, there is one line in your essay that completely removes any credibility you may have had. You stated, "But for this gorehound, the prospect of watching people ripped apart in a realistic fashion, and then watching animals get ripped apart for real, is just too much..."
Excuse me sir, but you are NO gorehound. Not even a gore-puppy. Any true gorehound would have already seen this film. If they haven't seen it yet, they would upon hearing about it's content become obsessed with seeing it as soon as possible. The fact that you claim to be a fan of 80's Italian horror only serves to make your stance even more puzzling, as this film is widely regarded to be among the best of that genre. And you didn't even mention the groundbreaking way the film was actually a "film within a film", a concept that the milktoast "Blair Witch Project" outright stole and took credit for, decades later. That alone ought to peak your interest enough to get over any hang ups you may have about this flick.
So, in conclusion, if your fragile little sensibilities make it impossible for you to watch this movie, by all means don't. But don't call yourself a gorehound. You are a poser, and this flick is not for posers.
(Oh, and to the guy whining about Faces of Death, that movie is fake. The guy who made it admitted it's fake. Your wimpy nightmares were based on false death).
Reply
9-11-2009 @ 8:24PM
Steve R. said...
I saw CH without knowing what I was getting into. I consider myself a horror fan, but to be honest I was literally sickened watching this. The animal killings were too much... I felt my stomach turning. The gratuitous nudity and gore were WAY over the top. There's not even really a storyline to speak of (at least one worth the time it takes to watch the film). After it was over, I sat there stunned, wondering why I didn't turn it off.
Bottom line: This IS the one movie I wish I could un-watch.
Reply
9-12-2009 @ 2:55PM
SICKOPATH said...
Steve R, please stop considering yourself a horror fan. Clearly you are not one. Did you really say, "The gratuitous nudity and gore were WAY over the top."? As if that's a bad thing? Cannibal Holocaust is filled with HORROR. Whatever it is you think you're a fan of, horror is not it. And yet, you watched the entire thing, even though you don't really like horror. This demonstrates the power of this film. You were transfixed by the horror you so obviously don't enjoy.
Perhaps you like scary movies, or cheap thrillers, or suck wad PG-13 ghost stories about Japanese women's spooky hair, but you certainly don't like horror. Quit pretending you do.